Iraqi and American democracy

[Chambers, Henry]

I took Sandy's point in his original post to be simply that the type of
constitutional democracy that the Bush Administration is pushing in the
rest of the world is substantially different from the constitutional
democracy that it and its allies have tried to push here.  As noted by
others, Sandy's post - whether it is persuasive or not - has pretty
obvious links to constitutional law.

I don't see how his post can be considered nearly as destructive of
reasoned constitutional analysis as the examples below suggest, unless
the mere mention of Tom DeLay's actions - actions that have had an
effect on the make-up of Congress - makes a post so troubling that the
useful discussion of constitutional law cannot flow from it.  Surely
that cannot be the case.   


-Hank 


Henry L. Chambers, Jr., Professor of Law
University of Richmond
28 Westhampton Way
Richmond, VA 23173
804-289-8199


-----Original Message-----
From: conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:conlawprof-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Volokh, Eugene
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 1:53 PM
To: conlawprof at lists.ucla.edu
Subject: RE: Iraqi and American democracy

	I appreciate Bob's point, and I'm not firmly opposed to discuss
of "constitutional attitudes."  But it seems to me we need to think hard
whether any particular such discussion is likely to be particularly
helpful.  Consider the following possible discussions:

	1.  Whether our constitution is in trouble because evil
Republicans like Delay, Frist, Bush, Rove, Ashcroft, and others are
corrupt, or are running a deceitful, dangerous war that will undermine
American interests.

	2.  Whether our constitution is in trouble because evil
Democrats like Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Tom Daschle, and others
are corrupt (imagine this circa 1998), hate America, and are running a
deceitful, unpatriotic antiwar campaign that will undermine American
interests.

	3.  Whether our constitution is in trouble because the culture
of death created by pro-choice forces who are willing to slaughter
millions of the unborn will lead to still broader disregard for human
life and liberty.

	4.  Whether our constitution is in trouble because the
Republicans have created a system in which the rich are getting richer
and the poor are stagnating.

	5.  Whether our constitution is in trouble because the Democrats
have created a system in which the government is routinely expected to
steal from the rich to give to the poor, and the poor are locked in a
cycle of dependency as a result.

	The list could go on.  My guess is that most of these are likely
to lead us pretty far afield from our core area of expertise; are likely
to shed much more heat than light; and in general are much less likely
to produce useful, enlightening discussions that will help us as law
professors do better in our teaching, scholarship, and understanding of
constitutional law.

	Eugene